What ships SHOULD they have used in the Dominion War?

[Arpy]

I really don’t like kitbashes like the Hermes/Paladin Classes and others. Aside from generally (though not always) preferring ships with even-numbered nacelles, it doesn’t make a lick of sense to have a much smaller ship with a much larger ship’s saucer or nacelle or other parts. You can add monster truck tires to a Chevy, but it looks stupid and functions poorly. And you certainly don’t sell it that way at the dealership and continue to make them for decades. It’s just crazy.

In a world in which time and budget were not an issue, there is only an infinitesimal chance that any designer/producer approves such a design. Any more than they would using tiny 12-man Klingon birds-of-prey to outright dwarf Romulan warbirds in “The Defector.” This being a thread about what ships they SHOULD have used, I feel the need to reiterate this point.

And I mean, why would the Enterprise have a secondary hull at all if they could slap a warp core (and in some cases deflector dish and shuttlebay) in its rather thin saucer?

I tend to think of saucers as the “habitat ring” of a starship. It’s the stardrive that’s the actual ship and the saucer an addition for crew and labs.

And they’re not necessary for smaller ships (they’re a terrible use of space on smaller ships) or on ones with shorter missions, not necessitating more elaborate layouts.

Some examples:

SNW USS Kelcie Mae

DS9 Sydney Class

Comics Risa Express

ENT SS Conestoga

Games Mary-Jane Class (variants)

Fan Balclutha Class

Jackill:
Hollingsworth Class (penetration cruiser)
Stormbringer Class (corvette)
Carver Class (corvette)

And of course the Galaxy Class doesn’t need its saucer and per Worf in “Heart of Glory”, “When relieved of its bulk, the Enterprise becomes an exceptional weapon.”

 

[publiusr]

I want a Refit but using those Corvette hulls for a TMP saucer to go atop.

 

[Arpy]

Mostly due to it's wide Delta Shape, but it's thinner than most secondary hulls as well.

I think it's still bigger. The overall displacement is greater.

But it's a "One-Off" design and isn't a standard CrossField setup.

Why do you say that? We've actually seen two and they were identical. Others could have been built later. No need for there to have only ever been 12 Constitutions either.

No, but they have to accomodate the Warp Ring system, so they end up being pretty big naturally.

It's not just the rings.

But building bigger ships means less resources for more smaller ships.

You can only gather so many resources at one time and refine it, it's not like they have a infinite supply they can generate at once, so it takes time.

There are many advantages to making smaller ships and more of them.

Also, crewing larger ships becomes a logistical nightmare in terms of man power, even with advanced automation.

My eyes start to glaze over when people start talking about resources for this fictional universe. The Federation is likely trillions of people across thousands of inhabitable planets and, what, hundreds of thousands (or more) other planets, moons, and large asteroids? These people are masters of the fabric of space, matter, energy, and gravity (of time even), among other things. Realistically Starfleet should be millions of ships, some larger than super star destroyers.

The original design reason was for the Warp Nacelles on either side to have a clear line of sight to each other.
But that split shell makes for ALOT of inefficient use of volume IMO.

Again, we don't know how inefficient it is because we don't know what the thinking behind it is. Frankly I think it's one of the most intriguing design elements in all of Star Trek. More Romulan ships should employ it. Other species should have their own exotic designs/technologies. The Tarellian plague ship's glowing engine core was so alien and strange. Same with the Borg Cube.

 

[Ithekro]

The Federation has what 150 member worlds in the 24th century? Across 8,000 light years? With the homeworlds of most of its member species having in the few billion people range due to either disasters or spreading out with colonies. Most colonies seem to have less than a million people on them.

 

[Arpy]

The Federation has what 150 member worlds in the 24th century? Across 8,000 light years? With the homeworlds of most of its member species having in the few billion people range due to either disasters or spreading out with colonies. Most colonies seem to have less than a million people on them.

Trek vastly underplays numbers, probably to be more “relatable” to us. But do you know how many planets there are across 8000 light years of space? The galaxy is 100,000 ly and has roughly 400 Billion planets. Do the math. Plus even more moons and asteroids. Plus massive Soacedock and Yorktown-sized stations and orbital habitats. Some planets could/should have a billion people in orbit alone. Homeworld populations should be in the 20 to 100 billion range, or more. Plus dozens of colonies, some in the billions. Especially for the older species. Again these people mastered matter, energy, and gravity. Resources to them are limitless in comparison to us, and we’ve already got 8 billion people on this planet 300 years behind the mark.

 

[KamenRiderBlade]

Why do you say that? We've actually seen two and they were identical. Others could have been built later. No need for there to have only ever been 12 Constitutions either.

Have you not been watching SNW?

Spoiler: ST:SNW S2 spoiler

We saw what a unmodified Crossfield class should look like early on in S2.

My eyes start to glaze over when people start talking about resources for this fictional universe. The Federation is likely trillions of people across thousands of inhabitable planets and, what, hundreds of thousands (or more) other planets, moons, and large asteroids? These people are masters of the fabric of space, matter, energy, and gravity (of time even), among other things. Realistically Starfleet should be millions of ships, some larger than super star destroyers.

Spoiler: Here's the Approximate 2D area of the UFP post Voyager.

While UFP territory is large, it's not that large in the grand scheme of things.

Spoiler: Here's the original 2D map that I base it on.

Spoiler: [NOTE: Not to scale] General Shape of our Galaxy and probably most Galaxies from a side orthographic view

Spoiler: Stats for the Approximate sizes of the major galactic structures.

Trek vastly underplays numbers, probably to be more “relatable” to us. But do you know how many planets there are across 8000 light years of space? The galaxy is 100,000 ly and has roughly 400 Billion planets. Do the math. Plus even more moons and asteroids. Plus massive Soacedock and Yorktown-sized stations and orbital habitats. Some planets could/should have a billion people in orbit alone. Homeworld populations should be in the 20 to 100 billion range, or more. Plus dozens of colonies, some in the billions. Especially for the older species. Again these people mastered matter, energy, and gravity. Resources to them are limitless in comparison to us, and we’ve already got 8 billion people on this planet 300 years behind the mark.

That doesn't mean resources are infinite, it's just more plentiful than what we can harness now.

You definitely don't want all your population to be that concentrated on one planet.

Having 20-100 billion people on a Earth-sized M-class planet is a bit too much.

Spread them out as much as possible.

If anything, you might want to have a artificial population cap of 10 billion per Earth-sized M-class planet so you don't over abuse the resource usage.

 

[Arpy]

While UFP territory is large, it's not that large in the grand scheme of things.

It doesn’t have to be given the size of the galaxy. There are enough planets in those 8000 ly to support trillions.

Coruscant is estimated to have between 1-3 Trillion people (or even 895 Trillion) itself. Well, lots of planets are much older and spacefaring than Earth.

That doesn't mean resources are infinite, it's just more plentiful than what we can harness now.

The point is that the way it’s often depicted is no different than us today. There are lots of resources (and technologies to maximize as well as to reuse them) than we often talk about.

You definitely don't want all your population to be that concentrated on one planet.

Or in one star system for that matter but 100 billion in the home system and tens of billions in surrounding ones is not undoable. Solar power alone could sustain far greater numbers.

Having 20-100 billion people on an Earth-sized M-class planet is a bit too much.

We’re projected to reach 10.4 Billion by 2100 and we’re pre fusion energy and replicator. I think at least a handful of the more advanced or older Federation members, as well as some of the more unusual aliens, should have some super huge populations. Both on their homeworlds, and in surrounding systems.

 

[KamenRiderBlade]

It doesn’t have to be given the size of the galaxy. There are enough planets in those 8000 ly to support trillions.

True, but it doesn't have to be so concentrated on 1x planet, we can be more evenly distributed across planets & space colonies.

Coruscant is estimated to have between 1-3 Trillion people (or even 895 Trillion) itself. Well, lots of planets are much older and spacefaring than Earth.

Coruscant has to survive on Atmospheric scrubbers and importatation of alot of basic resources due to it being a Ecumenopolis.

The point is that the way it’s often depicted is no different than us today. There are lots of resources (and technologies to maximize as well as to reuse them) than we often talk about.

But that doesn't give it a cart blanche access to resources to build things willy nilly.
Remember we also recently went through a recent global logistics supply chain issue, it doesn't take that much to grind things to a halt.

Or in one star system for that matter but 100 billion in the home system and tens of billions in surrounding ones is not undoable. Solar power alone could sustain far greater numbers.

For the electrical needs, sure, but there are other issues I'm more worried about, food & water supply, environmental effects, etc.

We’re projected to reach 10.4 Billion by 2100 and we’re pre fusion energy and replicator. I think at least a handful of the more advanced or older Federation members, as well as some of the more unusual aliens, should have some super huge populations. Both on their homeworlds, and in surrounding systems.

But we're also ravaging the planet in terms of pollution, environmental needs, etc.
That's why it's not just about Energy Generation, that's only one aspect.
Food, Water, mineral resources, energy storage, etc.
Until we can get to 10 Billion without wrecking the Global Ecology & Polluting the Environment, then we need to redo & re-think how we get things done.

 

[Arpy]

True, but it doesn't have to be so concentrated on 1x planet, we can be more evenly distributed across planets & space colonies.

I think it can seem concentrated if you think of the number close to the max for the species, but in my mind the majority would be on colonies and in space even with a larger numbers of homeworld population we're discussing here. Also wouldn't realistically be an even distribution not the least of which as that would take up many more resources to maintain it––you get a planet; and you get a planet; and everybody get's a planet!

Coruscant has to survive on Atmospheric scrubbers and importatation of alot of basic resources due to it being a Ecumenopolis.

Coruscant doesn't have replicators and is a fantasy world based on the conventions of ours. The real future will see whole new science and technologies to meet the needs of the day. Earth is raising new continents in TNG's "Family" and there are floating cities on Ardana (TOS) and Majalan (SNW). Plus they're terraforming whole planets in "Home Soil"; allocating resources to keeping the air clean on the homeworld seems a much smaller feat.

But that doesn't give it a cart blanche access to resources to build things willy nilly.
Remember we also recently went through a recent global logistics supply chain issue, it doesn't take that much to grind things to a halt.

Building whole societies on distant worlds or terraforming them and then doing so, then transporting goods and services too and fro is profoundly more expensive than maintaining large populations on existing and seemingly very successful planets.

For the electrical needs, sure, but there are other issues I'm more worried about, food & water supply, environmental effects, etc.

But we're also ravaging the planet in terms of pollution, environmental needs, etc.
That's why it's not just about Energy Generation, that's only one aspect.
Food, Water, mineral resources, energy storage, etc.
Until we can get to 10 Billion without wrecking the Global Ecology & Polluting the Environment, then we need to redo & re-think how we get things done.

I think it's all doable for these people and, honestly, probably even for us if we chose to do it better. We could do transportation, farming, manufacturing, public policy, conservation, and a lot of things better than we do now and both save the environment and grow in numbers and productivity, but we don't. ...maybe the AI's will help us move things along better. We could surpass the 10.4 Billion in 2100 and have a cleaner planet, healthier population, and exquisite ecosystem.

 

[KamenRiderBlade]

I think it can seem concentrated if you think of the number close to the max for the species, but in my mind the majority would be on colonies and in space even with a larger numbers of homeworld population we're discussing here. Also wouldn't realistically be an even distribution not the least of which as that would take up many more resources to maintain it––you get a planet; and you get a planet; and everybody get's a planet!

I'm not saying it'll be perfectly even, but it should be well distributed so that no one planet would have that size-able # of population. We'll have many planets with a reasonable population level, same with space colonies and StarBases.

Coruscant doesn't have replicators and is a fantasy world based on the conventions of ours. The real future will see whole new science and technologies to meet the needs of the day. Earth is raising new continents in TNG's "Family" and there are floating cities on Ardana (TOS) and Majalan (SNW). Plus they're terraforming whole planets in "Home Soil"; allocating resources to keeping the air clean on the homeworld seems a much smaller feat.

But it takes ALOT of resource / work to start fresh on a new planet, yes there is some temporary eco system loss, but we get many cities and a giant population boom along with access to many types of resources along with growth in the economy.

Building whole societies on distant worlds or terraforming them and then doing so, then transporting goods and services too and fro is profoundly more expensive than maintaining large populations on existing and seemingly very successful planets.

But resources per citizen and maintaining the ecological balance along with frontier growth has a huge effect.
Given the Replicator economy, moving to a frontier planet where it's not as developed should offer new settlers greater access to resources for a much cheaper cost along with helping being a pioneer for new colonists.

On developed planets, the Eco Systems & raw material resources needs to be balanced, but everything is well developed.

New frontier colonies on planets have whole new resource pools to work with, so getting access to raw materials should be dirt cheap along with the thrill of living on a Frontier lightly colonized planet, but with modern amenities.

I think it's all doable for these people and, honestly, probably even for us if we chose to do it better. We could do transportation, farming, manufacturing, public policy, conservation, and a lot of things better than we do now and both save the environment and grow in numbers and productivity, but we don't. ...maybe the AI's will help us move things along better. We could surpass the 10.4 Billion in 2100 and have a cleaner planet, healthier population, and exquisite ecosystem.

It's not AI that's going to help us, it's better mass education and teaching.
Too many parents and teachers are relying on tech to do their job, good teaching unfortunately requires teaching the hard way IMO.
AI is just another tool, too many people want to use it as a replacement for labor.
It's not going to be what most people think it is.
We could surpass 10.4 Billion by 2100, but do we want to, should we?

I care more about quality first, then raw #'s.

So working towards a cleaner planet, healthier society, cleaner eco system, sustainable growth, along with numerous other things is key.

Just consuming for the sake of consuming doesn't make sense.

Simple solutions like BYOU (Bring Your Own Utensils) could dramatically lower the need for single use disposable utensils.
That causes ALOT of trash that doesn't get recycled.

Recycling Plastic Utensils: Is It Really Helping The Planet?

That’s right: Plastic forks, knives and spoons may be made with recyclable plastic, but that doesn’t mean they actually can or will be recycled.

Long time ago, we used to have Milk Bottle services where your Milk gets refilled by the local milk man.
That was far more ecologically friendly to re-use the glass bottles than to have single use disposable plastic or paper cartons.

The entire mentality of "Single Use, & disposable immediately afterwards", needs to go into the recycle bin of history and we as a society need to move forward with less waste and more re-use.

Part of the base Reduce - Reuse - Recycle motto.

Talk is cheap, but implementing it at a "Massive Global Scale" is far harder.

 

[Arpy]

I'm not saying it'll be perfectly even, but it should be well distributed so that no one planet would have that size-able # of population. We'll have many planets with a reasonable population level, same with space colonies and StarBases.

I don't think having that size a population as a bad thing. It wouldn't be crowded, dirty, and dystopian––quite the opposite. I actually see a lot more living space per capita than we have today and a lot more plant and animal life brought back from the brink, hell, brought back from extinction, and brought back from off world, all living in dazzling harmony.

I do think that there's something more dystopian about the false bucolic Stepford Wives version of utopia in the spread out vision. Frankly there's something sociopathic about it. And would result in an awful interstellar sprawl. Possibly a neo-Feudalist movement.

Again, I do see far more people living on colonies and outside their home star system than in – for the most part; some aliens are peculiar, or simply newer to the stars – but I do see homewards and successful older colonies in the billions sure, why not? Hell, Vulcan has been traveling the stars for 2000 years or more.

I don't see why you're thinking it's the one or the other. I'm saying it's both. But if Earth reaches 20 billion and it's great, the government isn't going to half the planet they have to leave because "reasons."

It's not AI that's going to help us, it's better mass education and teaching.
Too many parents and teachers are relying on tech to do their job, good teaching unfortunately requires teaching the hard way IMO.
AI is just another tool, too many people want to use it as a replacement for labor.

Leaving us to become artists, athletes, and explorers, among other things. I think that's a good thing. I think AI's are going to supercharge progress and help us live longer, healthier, happier lives with less corruption, waste, and war in our societies. That is, of course, if we don't kill each other before then, or program them to ultimately do so for us.

 

[KamenRiderBlade]

I don't think having that size a population as a bad thing. It wouldn't be crowded, dirty, and dystopian––quite the opposite. I actually see a lot more living space per capita than we have today and a lot more plant and animal life brought back from the brink, hell, brought back from extinction, and brought back from off world, all living in dazzling harmony.

I do to, but it comes with people management and population distribution.

I do think that there's something more dystopian about the false bucolic Stepford Wives version of utopia in the spread out vision. Frankly there's something sociopathic about it. And would result in an awful interstellar sprawl. Possibly a neo-Feudalist movement.

There's too much land / area for a "Neo Feudalism" to occur along with governments learning from past history.

Again, I do see far more people living on colonies and outside their home star system than in – for the most part; some aliens are peculiar, or simply newer to the stars – but I do see homewards and successful older colonies in the billions sure, why not? Hell, Vulcan has been traveling the stars for 2000 years or more.

I have no problems with billions up to a certain point, but Trillions? That's too much.
We don't need to manufacture Ecumenopolis on existing M-Class planets.

Plus we already have control of the Dyson Sphere that Captain JLP found.
Retro-fitting that, fixing the star inside to be stable, that's going to provide ALOT of surface area to live on.

Inside & Out.

I don't see why you're thinking it's the one or the other. I'm saying it's both. But if Earth reaches 20 billion and it's great, the government isn't going to half the planet they have to leave because "reasons."

Ecological Management for the environment along with resource load balancing.
That's why people would be sent off world.

Leaving us to become artists, athletes, and explorers, among other things. I think that's a good thing. I think AI's are going to supercharge progress and help us live longer, healthier, happier lives with less corruption, waste, and war in our societies. That is, of course, if we don't kill each other before then, or program them to ultimately do so for us.

I see alot of bad things that people want to use AI for, that's going to be really bad for society, especially replacing existing jobs.
And too many people want technology to replace learning and hard work.

That won't help society at large.

 

[Ithekro]

What we have been seeing in our own cultures is that the higher education of the population and less needs for labor result in reductions in population. Europe's population is getting older and decreasing with families having one child or not having children due to expense or other reasons. The population growth on Earth today is largely Third World Countries or related cultures which still have an emphasis on large families for one reason or another. Be it survival or a lack of education/status to the females of said culture.

If this idea persists in the 24th century, it is likely that humanity will decrease in terms of population unless it is warranted to expand. Like for new colonies. Things like that might even force cloning just to keep the populations on new worlds stable. For Vulcan, if their mating cycle is every seven years, but does not always result in children, they too would have a potential negative growth population. The pon farr might even be a result of their negative population growth to stabilize their species so they don't go extinct.

Human and Vulcan populations can live older than we do now. Human seem to be able to live into their 120s with some regularity, with Picard being nearly 100 years old at the end of his series and active. Vulcans can live into their 200s and seem to still be active a bit. Klingons seem to be able to live quite a long time, if they don't die in battle.

 

[KamenRiderBlade]

What we have been seeing in our own cultures is that the higher education of the population and less needs for labor result in reductions in population. Europe's population is getting older and decreasing with families having one child or not having children due to expense or other reasons. The population growth on Earth today is largely Third World Countries or related cultures which still have an emphasis on large families for one reason or another. Be it survival or a lack of education/status to the females of said culture.

A good chunk of that is financial environment, it's getting harder to sustain a family, rampant inflation, costs going up, etc.
Not to mention ecological reasons, sociological, and numerous other factors.

It's not all "Higher education reduces the need for children". There are many more compounding external factors that causes that.

 

[evilchumlee]

Curry/Raging Queen types as carriers...seems to be the most common view. I can imagine them being used as carriers during the war, and then as gophers in the immediate post war years.

Carriers still just feel largely useless in Star Trek.

I don't think that small craft/fighters are necessarily useless, but they don't need carriers... they just have their own warp drive.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

Carriers still just feel largely useless in Star Trek.

For warfare they kinda are IMO.

I've always seen them as more of a combination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_tender and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibious_command_ship for more realistically sized "auxiliary vessels" like the runabout or the fighter/transport from Preemptive Strike (assuming that is also available to Starfleet) in sector patrol or search and rescue, and also a colonial support vessel (transporting large numbers of colonialists and initial materials).

 

[Ithekro]

Did we ever see a Curry/Raging Queen in combat, or just in aftermath scenes with the fleet under tow? Could they be a support ship that was jumped by the Dominion.

 

[Dukhat]

Did we ever see a Curry/Raging Queen in combat, or just in aftermath scenes with the fleet under tow? Could they be a support ship that was jumped by the Dominion.

Other than the Centaur engaging Sisko’s stolen Jem’Hadar bug, we never saw any kitbashes in combat or part of any fleet other than the retreating one at the start of ‘A Time to Stand.’

 

[Arpy]

There's too much land / area for a "Neo Feudalism" to occur along with governments learning from past history.

Societies tend to forget parts of history and repeat it to varying degrees. They, like each of us, can't keep everything they've experienced and learned in mind at the same time. If you isolate people in smaller remote colonies, they're a lot more vulnerable to powerful local magnates.

I have no problems with billions up to a certain point, but Trillions? That's too much.
We don't need to manufacture Ecumenopolis on existing M-Class planets.

Need? Nay, want. Coruscant is awesome. As is Trantor. Though, ideally, I'd want something that combines both those and large natural areas in something more spectacular. I don't necessarily see those in the Federation though, not yet. But I mean, where did the Iconians go? The Galaxy is a very big place. Heck, it can hide whole Dysonspheres not far from Federation space for a hundred years.

Ecological Management for the environment along with resource load balancing.
That's why people would be sent off world.

Yeah, but I'm not leaving my home. Even after many do, population growth is a result of success. Of people liking where they're at. Eventually the numbers will climb and we can adjust to maintain Paradise or see new problems arise, like social stratification...and maybe new versions of separate-but-equal reintroduce themselves.

Also, I mean realistically I wonder how habitable even worlds in the habitable zones might be in space. Would local conditions and lifeforms be poisonous or undigestible to us, and incompatible with what we would introduce alongside it? A bit like Eden in TOS but even there the life looked too much like that on Earth. But I don't think we fund a bunch of Earths out there in between a bunch of Marses and Venuses that we can solve population problems with. I mean it would be a lot less expensive to build the most luxurious, opulent, and expansive space stations you can imagine than colonize planets lightyears away. Look at Spacedock or Yorktown. I think there are a lot of diverse and dazzling large population centers in space.

I see alot of bad things that people want to use AI for, that's going to be really bad for society, especially replacing existing jobs.
And too many people want technology to replace learning and hard work.

That won't help society at large.

I think the learning and hard work change. We don't hunt for food or dig wells for water anymore yet we appreciate a good meal after a long day. But I mean, AI's are coming, and we can either evolve or fail to. Different is not worse.

What we have been seeing in our own cultures is that the higher education of the population and less needs for labor result in reductions in population. Europe's population is getting older and decreasing with families having one child or not having children due to expense or other reasons. The population growth on Earth today is largely Third World Countries or related cultures which still have an emphasis on large families for one reason or another. Be it survival or a lack of education/status to the females of said culture.

If this idea persists in the 24th century, it is likely that humanity will decrease in terms of population unless it is warranted to expand. Like for new colonies. Things like that might even force cloning just to keep the populations on new worlds stable.

I think stress and finances play a major role in the current birth rates. Our economies are propped up with cheap foreign labor and printed money while our own citizens are squeezed to hoard wealth at the top. It's no wonder that families who would like more children are deciding against. Instead we increasingly disappear into the dopamine-infusing Third Spaces that have become our screens. I don't think that continues in a Trek future. They celebrate their humanity, the infinite diversity in infinite combinations of life, including, presumably, their own.

 

[evilchumlee]

For warfare they kinda are IMO.
I've always seen them as more of a combination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_tender and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibious_command_ship for more realistically sized "auxiliary vessels" like the runabout or the fighter/transport from Preemptive Strike (assuming that is also available to Starfleet) in sector patrol or search and rescue, and also a colonial support vessel (transporting large numbers of colonialists and initial materials).

Something like that is more reasonable, and i've always figured that the USS Kelvin was exactly that sort of thing. It had ton of shuttles and volume, I figured it was supporting colonies and what not.

It seems entirely reasonable that Starfleet HAS vessels like this, we just don't necessarily see them (or we do see them, but they just aren't specifically spoken about.)

All of those random Miranda's and such could easily perform resupply duties.

They definitely DO have small aux craft... like the Runabout, the Scout from Insurrection, the Peregrine, although that does seem to have more of a combat bent.

Just judging by the interior systems look, the Maquis Raider type was almost certainly used by the Federation in the late 23rd century, early 24th.